Creatine supplementation is the most popular ergonomic aid for athletes in recent years and is used for improving sport performance and muscle growth. However, creatine supplementation is not always effective in all populations. To address these discrepancies, numerous studies have examined the use of creatine supplementation for muscle growth. This scoping review aimed to investigate the effects of creatine supplementation for muscle growth in various populations, in which Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review framework is used to present the findings. For this study, we performed a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for theses and articles published between 2012 and 2021. A manual search of the reference lists of the uncovered studies was conducted and an expert panel was consulted. Two reviewers screened the articles for eligibility according to the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute’s (NHLBI’s) quality assessment tool. A total of 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were finally included. All the authors extracted key data and descriptively analyzed the data. Thematic analysis was used to categorize the results into themes. Three major themes related to muscle growth were generated: (i) subjects of creatine supplementation—muscle growth is more effective in healthy young subjects than others; (ii) training of subjects—sufficient training is important in all populations; (iii) future direction and recommendation of creatine supplementation for muscle growth—injury prevention and utilization in medical practice. Overall, creatine is an efficient form of supplementation for muscle growth in the healthy young population with adequate training in a variety of dosage strategies and athletic activities. However, more well-designed, long-term RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed in older and muscular disease-related populations to definitively determine the effects of creatine supplementation on muscle growth in these other populations.

(1) Background: This study investigated the effects of caffeinated chewing gum on the basketball-specific performance of trained basketball players. A double-blind, randomized crossover design was employed. (2) Methods: Fifteen participants (age: 20.9 ± 1.0 years; height: 180.9 ± 5.4 cm; mass: 77.2 ± 7.5 kg; training age: 8.2 ± 0.3 years) were recruited and divided into a caffeine trial (CAF) and placebo trial (PL). The participants in the CAF trial chewed gum containing 3 mg/kg of caffeine for 10 min, while those in the PL trial chewed a placebo gum without caffeine. Following a 15 min rest, all the participants completed basketball-specific performance tests. (3) Results: The free throw accuracy for the CAF trial was significantly higher than that for the PL trial (CAF: 79.0 ± 4.31%; PL: 73.0 ± 9.16%; p = 0.012; Cohen’s d = 0.94). Additionally, the CAF trial demonstrated significantly better performance in the 20 m segmented dash (CAF: 2.94 ± 1.12 s; PL: 3.13 ± 0.10 s; p < 0.001; Cohen’s d =1.8) and squats (p < 0.05), and exhibited lower fatigue indexes (CAF: 3.6 ± 1.6%; PL: 5.2 ± 1.6%; p = 0.009; Cohen’s d =1.0). (4) Conclusions: These findings suggest that chewing gum containing 3 mg/kg of caffeine offers moderate-to-large improvements in key performance aspects relevant to professionally trained basketball players.

(1) Background: This study compared the effects of mouth rinsing with a carbohydrate trial (CMR) and a placebo trial (PL) on concentric and eccentric contraction strength in multi-joint resistance exercise performance. (2) Methods: Twenty healthy adult men (age: 22.4 ± 3.7 years, body mass index: 26 ± 3.8, peak power: 378.3 ± 138.7 W) were recruited in this study. Participants were employed in a double-blind, randomized crossover design to divide participants into carbohydrate mouth rinsing trial (CMR) and placebo trial (PL). After warming up, participants used 6.6% maltodextrin (CMR) or mineral water (PL) to rinse their mouth for 20 s. Next, the participants underwent tests of maximum inertial Romanian deadlift resistance exercise comprising five sets of six reps, with 3 min rests between sets. After deducting the first repetition of each set, the mean values from the five sets were analyzed. (3) Results: The concentric peak power of the CMR trial was significantly higher than that of the PL trial (p = 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.46), the eccentric peak power of the CMR trial was significantly higher than that of the PL trial (p = 0.008, Cohen’s d = 0.56), and the total work of the CMR trial was significantly higher than that of PL trial (p = 0.002, Cohen’s d = 0.51). (4) Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that mouth rinsing with carbohydrates before exercise can improve concentric and eccentric contraction strength in multi-joint resistance exercise performance.

Background: Caffeine intake in the form of chewing gum is characterized by rapid absorption and utilization. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of caffeinated chewing gum on exercise performance and physiological responses in a systematic review. Methods: All articles were searched using the PubMed and Scopus databases to include articles published up to June 2024, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Evaluation and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) protocol. Results: Thirty-two studies were finally included. Most studies have found that pre-exercise caffeinated chewing gum supplementation is effective in improving endurance, repetitive sprinting, lower limb strength, and sport-specific performance, as well as lowering rating of perceived exertion (RPE) or fatigue index even with lower dosages of caffeine. Sympathetic activation may be one of the mechanisms by which caffeinated chewing gum affects athletic performance. No significant effect on energy metabolism indicators (blood glucose, blood lactate, free fatty acids) was found. In addition, two studies found that caffeinated chewing gum reduced or maintained cortisol levels and increased testosterone levels. However, caffeinated chewing gum intake does not have an impact on catecholamines and β-endorphins. There have been inconsistent results for explosive performance, agility performance, and pain perception. Only a few studies have examined balance performance. In conclusion, a low dose of caffeine (100–300 mg or 2–4 mg/kg) in the form of chewing gum is rapidly absorbed and utilized, positively impacting most exercise and physiological performance. Conclusions: Future studies should also consider the performance variables of agility, pain perception, and explosive performance to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the effects of caffeinated chewing gum on sympathetic activation and exercise performance.

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of caffeinated chewing gum on the physical performance of elite ice hockey players after a jet lag intervention. Fourteen national-level (age: 25.2 ± 5.4; height: 176.5 ± 5.3; weight: 78.1 ± 13.4) ice hockey players were tested late at night after a full day awake schedule with jet lag. A randomised, double-blind experimental design was employed in which participants either chewed caffeinated gum (CAF) containing 3 mg/kg caffeine or a caffeine-free placebo gum (PLA) for 10 min prior to undertaking a series of on-ice and off-ice tests. The off-ice tests included grip force, the counter-movement jump (CMJ), and the squat jump (SJ). The on-ice tests included a 35 m sprint, the S-Shape agility test, and the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (Yo-Yo IR1 test). The CMJ height (CAF: 47.2 ± 4.4; PL: 45.9 ± 3.5; p = 0.035; Cohen’s d = 0.32) and SJ height (CAF: 46.7 ± 4.1; PL: 44.9 ± 3.8; p = 0.047; Cohen’s d = 0.44) were found to be significantly higher in the CAF than in the PL trial. However, there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in grip force, as well as in the 35 m sprint, the S-Shape agility test, and the Yo-Yo IR1 test. The present study found that, following a jet lag intervention, although the consumption of caffeinated gum resulted in an increase in vertical jump height, it had no impact on performance in the ice tests. The results of this study may help coaches and athletes consider the need for caffeine supplementation when experiencing jet lag.

(1) Background: Carbohydrate mouth rinsing (CMR) stimulates the central nervous system and improves motor control. However, no studies have examined the effects of CMR on softball batting performance. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of CMR on softball batting performance. (2) Methods: Fifteen trained female collegiate softball players (age: 20.6 ± 0.9 years; height: 159.5 ± 5.2 cm; body weight: 58.1 ± 6.9 kg) completed two trials in a randomization crossover trail, in which they rinsed their mouths for 20 s with 25 mL of either 6.4% maltodextrin (CMR) or a placebo (PLA). After rinsing, the Posner cueing task and grip force, counter-movement jump (CMJ) and batting tests were performed in sequence. A tanner tee was utilized to hit five sets of five balls at a time, with a minimum 3 min rest between sets. The batting test recorded the average exit velocity, maximum exit velocity and launch angle consistency. The standardized standard deviation (SD) for launch angle represents the standardized variability. (3) Results: The consistency of the launch angle of the CMR trial was significantly greater (p = 0.025; Cohen’s d = 0.69) than that of the PLA trial. There were no significant differences in the Posner cueing task, grip strength, vertical jump, or exit velocity. (4) Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that CMR enhances the launch angle consistency of all-out-effort batting, but does not influence the exit velocity of softball hitting.